How to burn an opportunity for universities to shine...

Marking can be time-consuming - but at least a break! And a chance to catch up on emails.

I received a rather distrubing email from one of my former universities. Since it is an open letter, I have no qualms about posting a link to it.

In summary, it is an open letter signed by the Principal and their Students Association President. It makes that case that the university gets a lot of EU funding and that Brexit would make this uncertain, so alums should think about this when voting.

A theme I will be likely to come back to again and again is the idea of the university as a 'neutral space'. Another is the corrupting influence of the state on the ideals of the university.

Now the role of the Students Association is a different matter. But for the University to have signed this off, I think was ill-advised.

First it gives an impression that the only reason that the university cares about the referendum is its funding stream. Wider aspects such as informing the debate in society are demoted.

Second, there is a danger that the Universty will alienate or further distance stakeholders, who may be more firmly in the leave camp.

Third, I cannot see that this letter would not have a 'chilling effect' on a free and open debate. Publically disagreeing with a stated position of the university will inevitably make some people pause for thoughr. Yes, there is a lot of softening language in the letter, but it is taking a position,

The first of the two are reputational. As an alumus I am not happy, but the University's reputation is its own to manage.

The final goes against what I believe universities are there for. What this letter loses sight of is that the university has a wider role in providing a neutral space for debate. The Brexit argument is also not really economic, it is really about issues of national vision and governance. The letter mentions this as an afterthought (in a way that could lead one to suspect that the 'debates' will be aimed to influence an agenda rather than get people thinking through all sides of the argument).

The above said, I would be a bad person to ask for a donation in the near future.

This should worry you...

I've been thinking about blogging again, especially regards concerns such as the creeping power of the state in higher education and how universities are buying into this (and not for the reasons that the Islington Guardian reading set and professional left wingers would have you believe).

But you know, other stuff got in the way (contracts, travel)...

So this article 'THE: Higher education bill seeks powerful Office for Students'.worries me greatly and disturbed my morning cup of coffee.

The article outlines  the Higher Education and Research Bill 2016-17. The part that alarmed me was:

"The OfS [Office for Students] would also have the ability to revoke an institution’s right to call itself a university, even if that right was granted by Royal Charter."

Just in case one were to look at that in disbelief, the wording of the draft Bill is as follows:

"43 Variation or revocation of other authorisations to grant degrees etc

(1) The OfS may by order vary or revoke an authorisation given to an English
higher education provider or an English further education provider—

(a) by or under an Act of Parliament, other than under section 40(1) of this
Act, or
(b) by Royal Charter, to grant taught awards, research awards or foundation degrees.

(2) That is the case even if the authorisation was given for an indefinite period.

The journalists seem to have their facts straight here. In short, the new OfS formed by this bill could revoke Cambridge University's Royal Charter without recourse to Parliament (and even an Oxford graduate would not wish this upon them).

The issue here is HEI autonomy and the levers that the state can use/abuse to align HEIs with its agenda. It is supposed to be hard to remove degree awarding powers, as that is a protection for HEIs against the state.

Now the state does have a legititmate say in how any monies it gives to HEIs are spent. That is covered by the contracts universties enter into (e.g. the HEFCE Financial Memorandum or Research Grants). A university is free to decide not to enter into them (eg.Buckingham).

Now in the case of private HEIs this is less of an issue as they do not typically take UK students or research grants.

But both types of HEI take international students and QAA inspections are a condition of their UKVI licences.

So an HEI is policed to ensure that it is performing its educational duties and public monies are spent for their intend purposes. For a public university, protracted loss of the ability to take overseas students can be a major blow (London Met, anyone). For a private HEI it would likely shut it down in short order as few have no other viable business model.

In any case, there would be accountablity through the courts to ensure that ministers are acting within the powers given to them by Parliament

The question is: why would the state legitmately need more than the above?

Also were degree awarding powers to be removed from HEIs, who should do it? There has been an increasing democratic deficit over the last 20 years of the increasing use of secondary legistation where decisions are taken away for Parliament and give it to ministers or delegated bodies. This is such an example.

It could be too easy to bully and gag HEIs. If an HEI was obviously not upholding academic standards, then it would be no issue in the hardest case getting Parliament to vote an Act enabling removal of powers as would be the case now for Chartered Universities. So why make it easier?

In short, the proposals seem to be overly powerful. It is unclear why these powers are needed outside of making it tidier for ministers or civil servants. But at what cost in the future?

I will be reading the Act and the surrounding literature in the coming weeks. At first glance it reads as a change of structures and if (more) student finance changes are not in the frame it may pass the public by. But such structural changes can soften up change for a less obvious agenda.

That is what worries me.

Bloggage Elsewhere: AUA Netherlands/Belgium Study Tour

Again, life has been more interesting than blogging. However for those interested in international higher education will find the blog of the AUA Netherlands/Belgium Study Tour (which I am helping with) of interest.

http://auadutch2015.blogspot.co.uk/

Bloggage Elsewhere: AUA Poland Study Tour

I have been dormant - will write more another time. However I am coordinating the AUA's Study Tour of Poland, which has its own blog:

http://auapoland2015.blogspot.co.uk/

I'm back...

This blog has been quiet this year as I took a career break to travel the world. All I can say is that the experience was in many ways life-changing.

It was also a strange experience to watch the effects of a major funding reform in UK universities from afar. I am not sure we will fully understand the effects for a long time yet.

I am still very much concerned about how we can achieve a productive relationship between universities and the information professions as well wider issues in HE management and policy.

It has also made me think think very deeply about how universities could better prepare students for professional life without becoming training factories (which would be highly counterproductive).

Now I am back, the plan is to freelance in higher education. So I am available for consultancy and interim roles, from both the academic and professional management perspectives.

I am also available to undertake assignments in the wider private and public sector to help them create better, more productive relationships with universities.

For details, please see my LinkedIn page (see sidebar).

PS. I have reverted the title of the blog to its original title which best fits its wider focus.

Give the Gift of the IBM Enterprise Computing Scholarship this Christmas

City University London's Master of Information Leadership is offering a scholarship for April 2012 entry in conjunction with IBM,

http://www.city.ac.uk/interdisciplinary-city/centre-for-information-leadership/ibm-enterprise-computing-scholarship

Congratulations to both David Chan for securing this and IBM for having the foresight and vision to support the MIL and City's efforts to support the CIO community in this way.

Computer Weekly is again the media partner for the MIL scholarship; I enjoyed working with them immensely when I was at City.

Read the webpage for details and pass onto someone who you'd think make a great future CIO and help the IT profession get the future leadership it deserves.

In the Press: Supporting CAS, PASC = Skills Doublethink, PQA...

It's amazing how busy you can get when you are no longer working! But I'm now on top of the post-work arrangements and getting ready to travel the world in mid-January. So now would be a good time to review and catch up on press coverage I've been involved in over the last few months.

The first is an article in ComputerWorldUK that I'm an occasional contributor to. It's a call to support the excellent Computing at School group.

http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/management-briefing/2011/10/eric-schmidt-stated-the-problem-heres-how-we-can-fix-it/index.htm

There's little I can add to this article, except to reaffirm that supporting education is one of the most important things that the IT profession can do to secure its long-term future. Computing at School needs and deserves our full support.

The second was a response to the Public Accounts Select Committee (PASC) report on waste and overspend in public-sector IT. I wrote a byline article for PublicTechnology.net.

http://www.publictechnology.net/sector/central-gov/viewpoint-do-we-get-government-ict-suppliers-we-deserve

In the context of the PASC report I was also quoted in the following article making broadly similar points.

http://news.techeye.net/business/government-it-cartel-slammed

One reoccurring theme is that the public sector needs to up-skill its IT functions at the mid-career level. In this regard the Master of Information Leadership is clearly of its time. However, until I see proper investment in this area, I doubt we can take any claims of action on this problem seriously. Complaining about but not investing in your workforce is doublethink, irrespective of whether it is in the private or public sectors.

NB. I think that assuming that the private sector is immune from these issues of waste, weak talent management or mal-investment would be a mistake.

Third I had the pleasure of being invited to blog for the Guardian Higher Education Network on Post-Qualification Admissions (i.e. applying to UCAS after A-level results are known).


http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2011/sep/27/post-qualification-applications-applying-university

One point I was like to add is that I support PQA not because it is the easy or convenient thing to do, but because it is the right thing to do for applicants. The moral dimension of the role of universities is an under-considered aspect of the admissions narrative, but essential to their long-term sustainability.

I was also mentioned in the launch of City's undergraduate scholarships that I'm sure will help attract more talented students to their computing undergraduate programme; something that I am immensely proud to have been involved with.

http://www.computerworlduk.com/news/careers/3311390/city-university-offers-computing-scholarships-for-undergraduates/

http://www.pcadvisor.co.uk/news/enterprise/3311734/city-university-offers-computing-scholarships-for-undergraduates/

I've had a great time doing press while at City University London and especially working with the consummately professional Luke Nava, the School of Informatics' press officer.

Any press from now on will be in a private capacity or for a future job. Watch this space.